Two Visions: Together or Apart
The years 1500 to 1900
At the end of the 15th century Europe was tiny. They were lucky to have thrown the muslims out of Spain.
Imperialism:This means when one country takes over another.
The west, for various reasons, started to take over the world.
In 1800, European and america controlled 35 percent of the earth’s land surface. By
1914 they controlled 85%.
For four hundred years intercivilization relations consisted of the suibordination of other societies to Western Civilization.
((And the west won the world, not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion (to which few of other civilizations were converted))) but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.
In 1900 civilization meant western civilization.
Europeans fought over king v. religious control, and protestant against Catholic and In the process they created nation states from 1500 to 1800,
after that the principal lines of conflict were between nations rather than princes.
In 1793 the wars of kings were over the wars of peoples had begun. This 19th century pattern lasted until WWI.
After 1917 the conflict of ideologies supplemented that of nation states. Now that is dead All the great 19th century political ideals fought over were western.
The ideals fought over were communist (the nation shares) vs. capitalism (what you earn is yours). These are both western ideas. Infact nations are western ideas. Loyalty to a country and a people, not a king.
The new battle is over culture. And we will either apart or together as a world. The evidence to me is that we’ll grow together.
What makes the west the west?
1) the classical legacy including Greeek philosophy and rationalism, roman law, latin and christianity.
2)Division of Religion and Government. We fought for so long we got tired of it. It took hundreds of years.l the clashes between church and state authoriy are uniquesly western and contributed greatly to the western freedoms. (Also our experience in division is unkown in Russia or Latin america).
3) Human Rights.
4) The concept of the importance of law to civilized existence was inherited from the Romans. Medieval thinkers elaborated the idea of natural law.This laid the groud for constitutionalism and protection of human rights.
5) Social pluralism. We have diverse autonomous groups not based on blood relationship or marriage. First guilds, merchants, clergy, aristocracy and monastic orders. Our independent aristocracy limited absolutism.
6) Representative government. These bodies came from social pluralism and provided the frame for democracy
7) individualism, The romeo and Juliet revolution. And the idea of equal rights for all individual. This value is among the most important to us and among the least important worldwide.
first half of this century
Originally the west controlled all countries. (Western ways made us all so wealthy)
-Originally imperialism was shook off by asserting the universality of western values.
(Create a nation with rights and self determination)
-The rights of all nations to have the same rights that the West enjoyed.
People got their independence. Nations were created.
Make a nation (Include a flag and a hero and a holiday)
Second half of this century
Now these independent countries must decide who they are?
-Now it is done by showing the superiority of non-western values.
If you are wealthy people want to be like you (countries and people).
Politicians in non-western societies do not win elections by demonstrating how Western they are.
Electoral competition instead stimulates them to fashion what they believe will be the most popular appeals and those are usually ehthnic, nationalist and religious in character.
Democritization conflicts with Westernization. Democracy is inherently a parochializing, not a cosmopolitanizing force.
Religions are surging world wide.
Tell of the UN conference on birth control. Chinas womens human rights conference, Michael Fey.
Culture follows power
Draw the three cultures in contention in circles
Draw the map and show which areas are which and what organizations are unifying which areas.
When we ruled much of the world wanted to follow our ways. People believed that you have the right to make up your own mind about your life and your government.
Culture follows power and European colonialism is over and America’s hegemony is receding.
Decreases in economic and military power lead to self-doubt, crises of identity and efforts to find in other cultures the deys to economic, military, and political success.
As western power declines, the ability of the West to imose western concepts of human rights, liberalism and democracy on other civilizations also declines and so does the attractiveness of theos values to other civilizations. It already has. They used to envy us. Now...
The new question: Who are you?
During the cold war the question was which side are you on.
The question which side are you on has now been replaced with who are you. Each state must answer. And they are doing so by forming groups.
DRAW the 3 GROUPS IN CIRCLES
Draw the map
When searching for identity what matters are blood and belief Family and faith. The EEC is unifying, hong kong and taiwan are falling into the orbit of china. Latin america has several economic associations. Nafta is an attempt to absorb mexico in with us.
Balance of power and trade considerations sometimes lead to alignment between cultures. But generally allainces stay inside.
In the early 1990s regionalism is growing and trade within regions expanded faster than trade between regions.
Many foresaw the emergence of regional economic blocs. But region and culture don’t always go together. When that happens you get hate.
Military and economic allainces require cooperation which requires trust. israel willnot join the union of arab states and australia will not be successful in ASEAN. Turkey will not join the EEC.
Why do groups do people go towards groups?
First Civilizations are the biggest groups we belong to.
every one has mustliple allainces that compete with or reinforce each other: kinship, occupational, cultural, institutional, territorial, educationsal, ideological and other. German workers fighting is one example.
2nd, the increased salience of cultural identity is in large part, the result of modernization at the individual level and alienation.
Third, Groups need “others” at any level, personal tribal racial etc, can only be defined in relation to the other. French Germans, belgians etc increasingly think of themselves as Eruopean. Muslims and asians too.
Fourth, Competition those things which have always generated conflict between groups: control of people, territory, wealth and resources and power are alive. Cultural issues cannot be mediated like material ones.
finally, fifth, Hate and Conflict are normal throughout history.this is a bad sign.
ISLAM AND THE WEST
We have been enemies with Islam for 1400 years. The cold war is only fleeting compared to it.
They used to follow us, but as we go down in power...
One big problem we have with them is that they don’t separate religion and government (church and state). So we are the great Satan and their governments job is to get us.
Western government thinks that what individuals do is the individuals business. Islamic says that the governments job is to enforce religion.
The conflict also stems from the common universalistic missionary view of each. We think human rights and individualism are for the whole world they want obedience to the will of god.
other issues with them:
The islamic population growth, fundamental resurgence, our efforts to universalize. Also weapons issues, control of oil, migration, mass of terrorism and Western intervention.
Recently they have made overtures of peace but I have no hope it will work.
Read the article
A disproportionate number of small wars and terrorism involve islam. Why?
1) It is a religion of the sword. If you die fighting for Allah you go to heaven. It started with warring bedouin nomadic tribes. Muhammead himself is remembered as a hard fighter and skillful military commander.
2) Islam is undigestable they don’t assimilate and don’t deal well with minorities (their culture leaves less room for adoption and adaption than other religions and beliefs). So in india...
3) also their 19th and 20th century subjugation
4) demographic explosion: A large percent of their population is under 15 years of age.
5) Islam spread by land and so has many pockets of folks scattered around. The west imperialized by sea and so had no proximity to the conquored people.
6) they have no core state.
In the cold war we saw the commies as godless communists.
We now are seen as the godless west.
Public condemnations of their terror is rare. Our anger at our strikes on them is non-existence. In international conflicts, unlike ideological ones, kin stand by their kin.
ASIA, CHINA AND THE WEST
The Easts economic success has bred euphoria from western economists. They are thinking of money!
But Economic growth creates political instability within countries and between countries.
It allows asian countries to expand their military, promotes uncertainty as to the future relationships of such countries. It strengthens their ability to prevail. And as china gets rich it will start to swallow up other countries and we may want to stop it.
Our trouble with China
Our conflict with china includes including economic questions, human rights, tibet, taiwan, the south china sea and weapons proliferation.
Chinas increasing needs for oil are likely to cause it to expand its relations with iran iraq and saudi arabia.
For two hundred year we’ve worked to stop the emergence of an overwhelmingly dominant power in Europe. For 100 we’ve done the same in asia with the open door policy towards china.
after rapid industrialization and economic growth every major power (Britain, japan germany the soviet union) has engaged in outward expansion assertion and imperialism when or immediately
Western theory takes balancing. Balancing requires primary and secondary balancers. We’ve been the primary balancer in Asia. Will Japan step up? Indonesia and Vietnam are the two most blancers from SEAsia. All countries there have said they want our military support, but have accomodated china
They dont believe in balance of power.
Chinas confuscian view of power has others (US) looking to the middle kingdom.
It will not align itself with anyone, but will not shirk from helping islam (especially if they need the oil).
Countries will either join to contain (balance) china or bandwagon with them.
Asia is diverse
After centuries of war all the countries of Western Europe are stable democracies with market economies. Asia is not.
The multi power multicivilization nature of east asian countries includes few stable democracies, some dictators, communist gov, military gov.
No major organization brings them together.
Europes past could be asias future.
The end of the cold war brought their independence and economic success.
Culture is our conflict. At the broadest level the Confucian ethos pervading many asian societies stressed the values of authority, hierarchy , the subordination of individual rights and interests, the importance of consensus, the avoidance of confrontation, “saving face” and the supremacy of the state over society and of society over the individual. Also they tent to think of the evolution of their societies in terms of centuries and millennia and to Give priority to maximizing long term gains.
These attitutdes contrasted with the liberty, equality, democracy and individualism and distrust of governments, checks and balances, competition, human rights and ignoring of the future and past and focus on immediate gains.
Trouble negotiating with japan:
Because of our penchant to identify “good” relations with friendly relations, we have a disadvantage in competing with Asian societies who identify good relations with one’s that get them victories.
They don’t appreciate concessions, they expoit them.
THE FUTURE OF CIVILIZATIONS
the west (the decline)
Asia and islam say they are superior. We are too comfortable to think of it.
We’ve had an overwhelming impact on all other civilizations since 1500. We may think we are the only and dominate forever. Civilisations often think that they are forever and history has stopped and this is usually a bad sign. That might be us.
Modernization and industrialization are world wide. But the Islamic Resurgence and the economic dynamism of Asia demonstrates that other civilizations are alive and well.
Also, is the West not in decline? We show classic signs. When rich the leaders of a country spend money on themselves then people get poorer and iliterate and invasion comes when the country is no longer willing to defend itself.
Far more significant than economics and demography are problems of moral decline. Culturual suicide and plitical disunity.
1) increase in anti social behavior (stealing, drugs, crime etc) The thing that secures the state is the mind.
2) family decay (teenage, out of wedlock families, multiple fathers)
3) decline in social capitall (membership in oluntary associations and trust
4) weakening of the work ethic and rise of a cult of personal indulgence
5) decreasing commitment to learning and intellectual activities
6) splintering Can you name one country in which two languages and two cultural groups live side by side peacefully?
The future of the West depends on how it copes with these trends. Failings give rise to the assertions of moral superiority by Muslims and Asians.
We can reinvigorate with immigrants but minorities make us a cleft country. with potential for strife. Also we could lose our central theme, western civilization, which has defined our national identity. In the name of multiculturalism the identification of the USA with western civ has been denied.
The founding fathers saw diversity as a reality and as a problem: hence our national motto, e pluribus unum, chosen by a commitee of the Continental Congress consisting of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Teddy Roosevelt said Becoming a tangle of squabbling nationalities could ruin us.
The US doesnt’ have an ideology, it is one! When we put the group over the individual (gender sex, religion). When people define themselves in cultural terms what place is there for a society without a cultural core?
The rejection of creed and of Western civilization means the end of USA. If the US is de-westernized, the West is reduced to Europe and a few lightly poopulated settler countries. A miniscule and declining part of the world’s population
We need to defend our belief in parlimentary democracy, the rule of law, liberal capitalism and free trade and the shared European cultural heritage eminating from Greece and Rome through the Renaissance to the shared values, beliefs and civilizaiton of our own century. Including human rights and cultural freedom. These are European ideas, not asian nor african nor middle eastern (except by adoption)
The west and the rest
Three things to fear: Western arrogance, Chinese aggression or Islamic intolerance.
Universality of western civ is false immoral and dangerous. Culture is relative, morality is absolute.
Ways to achieve Civilizational peace
we must not be imperialistic culturaly. War could come from escalation of a fault line war in which aspiring muslim core states compete for the lead. The imbalance of power from rising china could also cause conflict.
Each civilization should have a permanent seat on the security council of the UN.
Also we should look for commonalities in our cultures. We have different priorities.
4) We must remember the clash between civilization and barbarism (internationalism has given refuge to mafia and drug cartels and terrorist gangs). Just as Europe and America must hang together or handg separately. Civilizations with their rich acocomplishments in religion, art literature, philosophy, science technology, morality and compassion will either hang together or hang separately. Clashes of civilisations will quickly end civilisations.
The other option is that we all become one. That is that we unify.
But if we unify, how many of us would be willing to Live according to the laws of Islam? How about living according to the dictates of the Chinese government?
If we unify it would have to be according to the priniples of the West.
There are many who think that all people will see that we are right and that the others are wrong. That we shall all turn on to consumerism and democracy and respect for human rights.
The UN’s declaration of the universal rights of mankind. The UN is caught because it wants to respect all cultures and yet cannot accept female genital mutilation or oppression of women in most of the world (the West is the only country with womens rights protected by anything nearing law).
It is against racism and so must be against racists countries like China and Intolerant countries like Iran.
You can see signs of this. China is creating areas where individuals can make choices in business (though not in politics).
Last week the President of Iran made some talk of being willing to have his government talk with ours. But the religious leader of Iran said no. He reaffirmed that we are the devil. infront of a crowd that chanted “Death to America”
The United nations starts when the West is on top of the world and it assumes that all will agree to western values. It is set up on Western lines. It has democracy. Its first document is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Ughh. It is based on everyone comprimising and agreeing. Is Islam going to agree that the great satan is okay to deal with? Is China going to accept equallity with the barbarians? I don’t think so.
Never the less, It is a great step forward towards becoming one world. It may yet work. It has a voice for everyone. I
It has a general assembly and the Security council. The council has eleven members. 5 permanent ones are: Britain, China, France , Russia and the US. The others are Each permanent member has a veto pwoer and the others are elected by the general assembly for 2 year terms.
Behind all of the seats are their countries and the power and ideas that they represent.
It has an international bank (The IMF) which has just saved Asia (largely bankrolled by the US). It has a world court. It has a world health organization. It does international peace keeping.
However, it recently kicked ass on an Islamic country and is widely (wisely) seen as a part of the West. And Asia often tells it to mind its own business.
Comparison of posibilities
MultiCulturalism Single Culture
Multi world West or Asia or Islam
Accepting, But pride in ones own Not accepting, stamping out diversity
Environmentally difficult Environmentally easier
History as cyclical History as progress
No choice (obey individual culture) No choice (obey modern values)
Last week Turkey came closer to going into civil war.
Which do we want in our country
Multi culturalism or uniculturism?
THE STRUCTURE OF CIVILIZATIONS
A member state is a country fully identified culturally with one civilization. As egypt with arab-islam or italy with europe west.
The Core State is the center of that civilization. Civilizations usually have one or maore places viewed by their members as the principal source or sources of the civilizaiton’s culture. These are located in the Core state.
The Germany and France are the core states of the West and China is the core state of Asia
Islam, latin America and Africa lack core states. Spain could of been it for south america but chose to be european
A lone country lacks cultural commonality with other societies. Ethiopia, coptic amharic language, imperial history. Haiti is another. Latin Americans don’t see haiti as latin american. The most important lone county is Japan.
A Cleft country is one that has two or more civilizations in it.
Almost all countries are heterogenious. But this can lead to calls for autonomy and separation. This is especially true if cultural differences coincide with differences in geographic locations. Deep divisions of civilization lead to a Cleft country.
Sudan (muslim north, christian south) Canada and Ethiopia with the muslim eritrea.
In a torn country there is a predominant single culture which places it in one civilization, but its leaders want to shift it to another. Russia has been this way since peter the great. Such efforts have largely failed. Russia is central and after 300 years of westernizing is still agonizing over the situation. They usually now run a western candidate vs a nationalist candidate. And their elections are close.
Turkey became a torn nation in 1920 under Mustafa Ataturk. it will never be accepted by the west though. It is in nato , but not the EEC. Turkey says it is a bridge. But a bridge is an artificial creation connecting two solid entities, but is a part of neither.
Mexico has only become a torn country since the 1980s. Mexico is non-western. It is indian and mexican. Also in the 2nd and 3rd decades it also went through a revolution. But it didn’t reject its core state like turkey, it embraced a western model. For 60 years turkey tried to get pro-west and mexico anti. Salinas did the change when he went for economic liberalism (he side stepped our other theme of democracy). He attacked labor, lowered inflation, restructured the debt and got into NAFTA. Both Mexico and turkey bring fears of immigration. Is nafta compatable with democracy?
Australia tried to move towards the asian model. Asia has rejected this unequivically.
That all of these attempts are less than successfull, it shows the resilience to culture over economic gain. Political leaders can make history, but they cannot escape history.
CORE STATES, CONCENTRIC CIRCLES AND CIVILIZATIONAL ORDER
The core states of the west are france and germany. Establishing the east west line for europe has been very difficult. Traditionally it ends where islam and orthodoxy begin. Nato has been opened to those beyond this line, but not EU. The baltic states have been negotiated in because they are western in history. Greece is the exception, but it has a history that makes it dear to the west.
Russia is the orthodox core. It has the ukraine and georgia, belarus and khazakstan, as well as the Orthodox balkans. It surrounds itself with a buffer from Islam with relatively weak islamic states.
Ukraine is cleft between western and orthodox divisions and vote accordingly.
China forms a core also. The chinese use a mirror test for citizenship. People of chinese descent, even if citizens of another country are members of the chinese community. And they are reasserting their traditional hegemony over the area.
Islam has no core. Islamic fundamentalism rejects the nation state in favor of the unity of Islam and the ummah, Whereas the west has been politically loyal to nation states, islam is based on clan and tribe on one hand and unities of culture religion and empire on the other. just as marxist rejected it for the international proletariate. There has been a steep increase in the number who go to mecca.
There are two reasons Islam has trouble getting together.
1) islam is divided among competing power centers. Sunni and Shiite Though occassionally the traditional antagonisms are bridged.
2) the concept of ummah presupposes the illegitimacy of the nation state and yet the ummah can be unified only through the actions of one or more strong core states. The concept of Islam as a unified religious-political community has meant that cores states have usually materialized in the past only when religious and political leadership - the caliphate and the sultanate - have combined.
From the Umayyad caliphate of demascus to the Persian baghdad Abbasid caliphate (later extending to Cairo and Cordoba, to the ottoman turks
south Africa is peculiarly qualified to lead Africa.
Having experienced the good and the bad of the West in Christianity and apartheid,
THE GLOBAL POLITICS OF CIVILIZATIONS
International conflict takes two forms. At the local or micro level, fault line conflicts occur between neighboring states from different civilizations. Core state conflicts occur among the major states of different civilizations.
The reasons are the eternal ones. But when the states are from different civilizations, cultural differences sharpen the conflict. Core state wars are otherwise likely to arise under on two circumstances.
1) They could arise from escalation of fault line conflicts.
2) Core state war could result from changes in the global balance of power among civilizations. When two sides are uneven there is more likelyhood of war.
FAULT LINE WARS
The Dynamics of fault line wars
Fault line wars go through intesification, expansion, containment, interruption and, rarely, resolution. They are identity wars.
1) As revolutions evolve, moderates lose to radicals.Moderates have smaller goals (rights not independence) don’t get them via negotiations. Others take over.
2)The victory of the extremists is not necessarily permanent. Extremist violence is no more likely than moderate compormise to end a fault line war. As cost in death and edestruction escalate without result, moderates areappear.
3) these may start with a family, or tribal dispute, but as the struggle progresses people broaden their identity. They play the civilization card..
Serbs becam e serb nationalists for greater serbia, then the serbvian orthodox church then the orthodox church. croats became defenders of the catholic west.. They voted for a manIzetbegovic who wrote that islam and non-islamic systems are incompatable.
Each group has incentives not only to emphasize its own civilizational identity but the others too. In its local war, it sees itself not just fighting another local group but another civilization and demonize it.
In the cold war conflict permeated downward. Now it goes upward.
Secondary states and their diaspora communities in them supply weapons (or are suspected of doing so). Germany and the west backed croatia and Russia blocked attempts at sanctioning/bombing serbs. Islam fell over itself provbiding arms and money and technicians. Why did we back bosnians (the exception) and anger NATO. Because we like good and multicultural or realpolitic?
Finaly,exhaustion sets in. But this only stops things momentarily. If a conflict is intracultural you need good office and some one whom both sides trust (this si difficult). In inter the secondary and core states must get involved in negotiations (usually not wanting to fight themselves) . They use carrots and sticks to get the primary fightrers to the table. the core states of the secondary and primary players force a negotiation. Since Islam has no core state, the US stood behind Bosnia. Yeltsin was caught between the west and the east. This conflict also tore at Turkey (with 5% ex-Bosnian pop).
Fault line wars are violent conflicts between states or groups from different civilizations. Usually they are over territory. Often to free their minority bretheren in another territory. They are hard to negotiate and the fires of such hatred often lead to genocide. philippines (50,000), srilanka (50-100,00000 kashmir (20,000) sudan (500,000 -1.5 million) tajikstan, croatia, chechnya tibet, east timor. And the refugee numbers are much higher.
Often they are new rounds in old conflicts and never reach final settlement.
A disproportionate number involve islam. Why? It is a religion of the sword. It started with warring bedouin nomadic tribes. Muhammead himself is remembered as a hard fighter and skillful military commander. 2) The west imperialized by sea and so had no proximity to the conquored people. Islam spread by land and so has many pockets of folks scattered around. 3) Islam is undigestable they don’t assimilate and don’t deal well with minorities (their culture leaves less room for adoption and adaption than other religions and beliefs). 4) also their 19th and 20th century subjugation 5) demographic explosion and 6) they have no core state.
Southern civs won’t be a problem. they lack core states Latin america is traditionally dependent on us and becoming more like us and will have good relations.
Russia could go either way We have to be ready to help them with islamics and make them a part of the western NATO or EEC and the defender of orthodoxy. Another issue with them is china expanding into siberia. 3-5 illegal immigrants in 1995.
Japan will probably go with china against us.
India is against pakistan (and so islam) and china is selling pakistan arms. Also, both countries are expanding so conflict seems likely. Both see themselves as giants and natural great powers and centers of civilization and culture. India will try to be a counterweight to china. India is close to , and gets arms from, russia and Weapons proliferation , human rights, and economic liberalization are issues we have with them.
pg 245 map of modern alignments
CLASHES OF CIVILIZATIONS
THE WEST AND THE REST: INTERCIVILIZATIONAL ISSUES
The major clashes of the future are likely to arise from the interaction of 1) Western arrogance, 2) Islamic intolerance and 3) Asian assertiveness.
1) Western Arrogance
We won! The collapse of communism exacerbated this discordance by reinforcing in the West the view that its ideology of democratic liberalism had triumphed globally and hence was universally valid.
The Conference on Womens rights! What is the first confucian relationship?
The West, and especially the US, has always been a missionary nation, believe that the non-western peoples should commit themselves to the western values of democracy, free markets, limited government, hman rights, individualism , the rule of law and should embody these values in their institutions. Universalism to us is imperialism to the rest .
Our hypocrisy also shines through. Democracy is promoted, but not if it brings Islamic fundamentalists to power. Human rights are imortant with China but not with saudi arabia.
With the challenger civilizations islam and china the west is likely to have consistently strained and often antagonistic relations. Its relations with latin america and africa, who are weaker and have depended on us, will involve much lower levels of conflict.
The relations of Russia, Japan and India to will fall inbetween because they are swing civilizations.
Our 3 major problems with “THEM”
Our major issues with them are now 1) our attempt to maintain military superiority via non-proliferation treaties 2) to promote western political values of democracy and human rights and 3) to protect the cultural , social and ethnic integrity of Westen societies by restricting the number of non-westerners admitted as immigrants.
The lesson from the gulf war. Don’t fight the US unless you have nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons confirm a tendency towards the fragmentation of the international system. Terrorism historically is the weapon of the weak. Since WWII nuclear weapons have also been the weapon by which the weak compensate for conventional inferiority.
China is playing the central role in the transfer of both conventional and nonconventional weapons to many Muslim states.
China suppliesd them to pakistan. And Iran during the iran iraq war. The west sees non-proliferation as for all, they see it as for us.
HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY
Democratization was most successful in countries where Christian and western influences were strong.
The west invented human rights and christianity gave us the idea of the value of the individual.
In East Asia, the Catholic and heavily american influenced philipines returned to democracy in 1980 while christian leaders promoted movement towards democracy in s. korea and taiwan. In countries where christianity is big they have democracy now except in cuba and parts of africa.
Asian governments remind us that the age of dependence and subordination is past and that the UN and the universal declaration on human rights are now part of history.
We have capitualate many times. We did nothing to singapore for michael fey or with indonesia for East Timor. Asian countries have supported themselves when we’ve tried to impose human rights.
And again we suffer from credibility from choosing friendly tyrants over unfriendly democracies.
This is part of decolonization. But it is also because transportation is improving. And a law in migration is that once a migration flow begins it induces its own flow.
In 1965 the US removed European-oriented quotas dating from the 1920s and made tremendous increases in immigration possible. In 1990 20 million first generation immigrant were in the US. The new immigrants come overwhelmingly from non-western societies. In the 1980s it was 35% asian 45% latin and 15% europe and canada.
Natural population growth is low in the US and virtuallyzero in europe. Immigrants have high fertiility rates. They, therefore account for most future population growth in Western societies.
By the early 1990s 2/3rds of the migrants in Europe were Muslim. Migrants account for 10 % of the births in Europe. Muslims don’t integrate.
The results have been varied. The germans have been racist, but the french have been more culturist. They have accepted black africans who speak perfect french in their legislature, butthey do not accept muslim girls who wear headscarves in their school